https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99782 Section 446(1) of the Companies Act, 1956 applies only to proceedings that the winding-up court can appropriately entertain or dispose of; rent control proceedings for fixation of fair rent or eviction, being within the exclusive jurisdiction of the special forum, do not require prior leave. On that reasoning, the absence of leave does not by itself render the resulting order void. The commentary also notes that the phrase "the court to which appeals ordinarily lie" in the rent control statute refers to the normal appellate forum, and a refusal of execution based on a mistaken view of law can amount to a failure to exercise jurisdiction, justifying revision and restoration of the execution petition. en-us Thu, 05 Jun 1980 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Jan 2012 11:14:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99782 Section 446(1) of the Companies Act, 1956 applies only to proceedings that the winding-up court can appropriately entertain or dispose of; rent control proceedings for fixation of fair rent or eviction, being within the exclusive jurisdiction of the special forum, do not require prior leave. On that reasoning, the absence of leave does not by itself render the resulting order void. The commentary also notes that the phrase "the court to which appeals ordinarily lie" in the rent control statute refers to the normal appellate forum, and a refusal of execution based on a mistaken view of law can amount to a failure to exercise jurisdiction, justifying revision and restoration of the execution petition. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 05 Jun 1980 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99782